The DAM Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
June 21, 2018, 08:44:40 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
28033 Posts in 5147 Topics by 2905 Members
Latest Member: kbroch
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  The DAM Forum
|-+  DAM Stuff
| |-+  Loss and Recovery
| | |-+  Photoshop for photographers
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Photoshop for photographers  (Read 3640 times)
Posts: 7

View Profile Email
« on: March 22, 2012, 12:53:09 PM »

Hi guys,
Why is it imperative - or is it, for a photographer who is already using Lightroom, Aperture or similar software to own and use Photoshop? What is it that Photoshop does that is indispensable for, say, landscape photographers?
People tell me they first move the image into Lightroom and then to Photoshop. What's the second phase about that is so crucial and is not achievable in Lightroom?

Thanks a lot.

Full Member
Posts: 239
View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: March 27, 2012, 06:12:36 PM »

landscape photography often requires blending of images for panos, simply higher res, or HDR.  You need a third party app to do that from Lightroom.  Working with Photoshop makes those operations particularly easy.  I suppose Elements could do this in a similar way but I don't know that for fact.  I love Lightroom but I still prefer Photoshop for more subtle and critical editing tasks.  Not every image needs that but those that do, get a trip to Photoshop.  How valuable Photoshop might be depends largely on your working style and imaging tastes.  I couldn't do without it.

Bob Smith
Mathew Farrell
Posts: 22

View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #2 on: April 01, 2012, 11:11:58 PM »

Lightroom has definitely reduced the necessity of photoshop for many images. ACR would do the same, but I don't think you can buy or get it without Photoshop anyway.

The way my workflow goes, and probably many folks now is such that most images get some form of editing in LR or ACR, then only open specific files in photoshop for special/deeper work such as stitching/HDR (relevant for you perhaps), etching, spotting, etc.

If I were strapped for cash, I'd get LR rather than PS, though both is a blessing.

Mathew Farrell
Flowstate Photography
Sr. Member
Posts: 308

View Profile
« Reply #3 on: April 07, 2012, 06:45:31 AM »

This is probably a case of "you'll know when you you find you need it". If LR is doing all the tasks you require, then great. On the other hand, if you find you want to perform some type of image enhancement that is beyond LR, you will naturally start looking into Photoshop (and the like) programs.

Not using LR yet (I am still EM2 for DAM), some things I do in Ps which may or may not be easily done in LR:
- blending of two or more images together (with blend modes, transparency differences, etc)
- targeted value adjustments (adjusting only mid-values, or darker-mid-values)
- as mentioned elsewhere, HDR and stitching
- files making use of Smart Objects (both other Ps images, and also Ai shapes)

and so on. You will know when/if you need a Ps type application.
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!